Contemporary use of ceftaroline fosamil for the treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia: CAPTURE study experience.

The Clinical Assessment Program and Teflaro(®) Utilization Registry (CAPTURE) is a multicenter cohort study designed to collect information on the contemporary use of ceftaroline fosamil in the US. Data collected from 398 evaluable patients with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) (mean age 64 years) during the first 18 months of the study are presented. Most patients had co-morbidities (76%; primarily structural lung disease), and ≧2 signs and symptoms of CABP (76%). Overall clinical success was 79% which varied little with ceftaroline fosamil usage (monotherapy vs concurrent therapy; first-line vs second-line therapy). Most patients were discharged home (60%) or to another healthcare facility (35%). These data suggest that ceftaroline, in contemporary clinical use, is an effective antibiotic for the treatment of patients with CABP, including those with significant co-morbidities or who required a change of their prior antibiotic therapy.

Ceftaroline fosamil and treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: CAPTURE study experience.

The Clinical Assessment Program and TEFLARO Utilization Registry (CAPTURE) is a multicentre retrospective cohort study in the USA describing treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection (ABSSSI) with ceftaroline fosamil (CPT-F). Charts for review were chosen by random selection. Among 647 evaluable patients, 52% were obese, 46% had diabetes mellitus (DM), and 19% had peripheral vascular disease (PVD). Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was recovered in 28% and methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA), 11%. Antibiotics were administered prior to CPT-F treatment in 80%, and concurrently in 39%. Clinical success overall was 85%; in patients with DM, 83%; with PVD, 76%; and in obese patients, 88%. Clinical success was ≥ 79% across all infection types; 81% for MRSA and 83% for MSSA; and 86% for ceftaroline monotherapy and 84% for concurrent therapy. These high clinical success rates support CPT-F as an effective treatment option for ABSSSI, including infections due to MRSA and patients with significant co-morbidities.

FOCUS 2: a randomized, double-blinded, multicentre, Phase III trial of the efficacy and safety of ceftaroline fosamil versus ceftriaxone in community-acquired pneumonia.

OBJECTIVES: Ceftaroline (active form of the prodrug ceftaroline fosamil) is a novel cephalosporin with activity against pathogens commonly associated with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), including Streptococcus pneumoniae and Gram-negative pathogens. This randomized, double-blind, Phase III study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ceftaroline fosamil in treating patients with CAP. The primary objective was to determine non-inferiority [lower limit of 95% confidence interval (CI) ≥ -10%] of clinical cure rates achieved with ceftaroline fosamil compared with those achieved with ceftriaxone in the clinically evaluable (CE) and modified intent-to-treat efficacy (MITTE) populations. METHODS: Patients hospitalized in a non-intensive care unit setting with CAP of Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team (PORT) risk class III or IV requiring intravenous (iv) therapy were randomized (1:1) to receive 600 mg of ceftaroline fosamil iv every 12 h or 1 g of ceftriaxone iv every 24 h. Clinical cure, microbiological response, adverse events (AEs) and laboratory tests were assessed. FOCUS 2 registration number NCT00509106 (http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00509106). RESULTS: The study enrolled 627 patients, 315 of whom received ceftaroline fosamil and 307 of whom received ceftriaxone. Patients in both treatment groups had comparable baseline characteristics. Clinical cure rates were as follows: CE population, 82.1% (193/235) for ceftaroline fosamil and 77.2% (166/215) for ceftriaxone [difference (95% CI), 4.9% (-2.5, 12.5)]; and MITTE population, 81.3% (235/289) for ceftaroline fosamil and 75.5% (206/273) for ceftriaxone [difference (95% CI), 5.9% (-1.0, 12.7)]. Clinical cure rates for CAP caused by S. pneumoniae in the microbiological MITTE (mMITTE) population were 83.3% (35/42) and 70.0% (28/40) for ceftaroline fosamil and ceftriaxone, respectively. Ceftaroline fosamil and ceftriaxone were well tolerated, with similar rates of AEs, serious AEs, deaths and discontinuations due to an AE. The most common AEs for ceftaroline fosamil-treated patients were diarrhoea, headache, hypokalaemia, insomnia and phlebitis, and the most common AEs for ceftriaxone-treated patients were diarrhoea, insomnia, phlebitis and hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: Ceftaroline fosamil achieved high clinical cure and microbiological response rates in patients hospitalized with CAP of PORT risk class III or IV. Ceftaroline fosamil was well tolerated, with a safety profile that is similar to that of ceftriaxone and other cephalosporins. Ceftaroline fosamil is a promising agent for the treatment of CAP.